Summations Only

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that priests can't molest children or murder millions who disagree with Romanism either. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Well kinda.The Bible says you should not commit murder whether is is Protestants killing Catholics or Catholics killing Protestants or either or both killing Muslims.And molestation is not a Biblical issue, it is a societal issue where religion is irrelevant.You just keep trying to palm the pea through misdirection don't you faith.

Isn't this what you say every thread?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

deleted. Decided there's no point in pursuing this topic.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

But if it's not in the Bible then it's pretty much just you deciding what qualifies as Christian and what doesn't, not God. Which is fine as long as you understand that that's what you're doing and stop putting words in God's mouth. You don't speak for God.Of course the Bible does say many things, and you can claim it's God word describing the Christian way, but there's no evidence God wrote the Bible.--Percy

Anyone who knows and believes the Bible and represents it correctly speaks for God, sorry.But you are right, it is a matter of opinions after all, the opinion of those who believe God and His word versus the opinion of those who reject it and support the RCC's paganism (indulgences, relics, prayer to "saints," repetitive prayers, prayers for the dead etc.) and all the rest of the offenses against both Christ and humanity by the red-and-purple-robed bejeweled anti-Christian hierarchy with its unChristian ambition to rule the world that anyone with the barest knowledge of the gospels of Christ ought to see in an instant bears no resemblance to same. But of course we can ignore the gospels, TRUE Christianity must be what the Pope says it is, huh?True, it's a matter of opinion. I know yours, you know mine, can we stop now?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This is your religious belief, with you personally (not God) deciding what it means to correctly represent the Bible. From the outside it's just two sides arguing over an ancient book of myths and legends, each with their own distinct interpretation. There is no "TRUE" Christianity, nor any "TRUE" religion. Religion is a social and cultural construct of men that has always varied and changed across geography and eras. Do what you like. For myself, I'm still interested in the thread's topic.--Percy

That raises a question: What does the Bible say about molestation? Does it speak for it? Or against it? Or take both sides? Or not even mention it at all?If the Bible is supposed to convey all of "God's absolute morality", then shouldn't it have something very definite to say about a very serious moral problem? A problem that almost everybody of all faiths, including atheists, agree is wrong.And what about something else that almost everybody (albeit more by atheists and less by religious fanatics) agrees is wrong: genocide. Now, we do know that the Bible does address genocide, but the only biblical references to genocide that I know of are God's commands to commit genocide. Does the Bible say anything against genocide?Curious minds want to know.

The Bible reflects the opinions of a peoples at a given point of time and within a specific culture so there is no one answer.There is the well known "Let he who is without sin caste the first stone" passage. Now the writer could have had the Jesus character say "Hey, stoning is wrong so don't do it." That would be clear and simple. But the author didn't. He says "look at yourself first and place yourself in the other persons position."The Bible is filled with God struggling with the issue of morality, questioning, unsure what is the right and moral path and the folk that try to pedal absolute Biblical morality or even God's absolute morality do a great disservice.Morality is difficult and every single instance must be determined using the knowledge available and the persons best judgement and empathy. Edited by jar, : ever ---> every

I agree with what you are saying.But if we were to take the perspective of someone trying to argue for absolute "God's morality", what guidance would we be able to find in the Bible on such issues as child molestation and genocide?Kind of going for proof by contradiction, I guess. Or just enjoying the irony that arises from taking them at their word, kind of like what I've often done with creationists' claims.

I don't think there was a concept of "child molestation" back then. Children were property just like women and used to gain power, prestige, wealth, advantage.Genocide is another similar issue. There just was no such concept. Even within groupings like the 12 Tribes you find examples of "us" and "them".When we talk about modern concepts like those we are simply trying to shoehorn our evolved morality onto an earlier period. Jess don't work.Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

You don't know the Bible.

Logic tells us that the Bible, more correctly the books of the majority canons..ie the 66 books included in the King James, NIV, and NEV which are the majority of western Christianity--were obviously and in fact written by humans. The larger question is whether or not these humans were motivated and/or inspired by ulterior motives or whether these humans were individually and collectively inspired by the Holy Spirit.Faith is defending her belief that the Bible was inspired by God and written by and through God.IThe obvious questions then are raised--in debate forums such as this one where we have believers, non-believers, and both witty and acerbic skeptics--as to which god we are talking about and whether in fact such a foundation can even be laid logically, reasonably, and rationally.Personally, I believe that the books of the Bible were inspired, but I can also see the contrarian point of view. As to which denomination is right I can only dare judge them on an individual, rather than collective basis.In conclusion, I will say that I have met individuals who are quite rational, and also fervent believers in God as many Christians understand God to be. Additionally, while it is true that much has been said about the errors of Roman Catholicism--to me the emphasis should be on the individual rather than the institution to which they belong. This holds true for each one of us involved in this debate. It also gets us back to the question. Were the individuals who collectively were responsible for deciding which words and books were to be allowed in the popular Bible motivated through prayer and a life where not just the mind and emotions but the daily will surrendered to God? Or...were they motivated by other spirits or vibes or intentions?

I would be more interested and impressed if the writer was a believer in God and accepted the "Jesus character" as more than simply a character. Of course this would only happen if the writer believed not only in the God he or she wrote about but the GOD --Creator of all seen and unseen--Who many would say reached out to humanity through Jesus Christ who was initially Gods character long before any writers got ahold of the script.

Why? How would you tell? What does that mean?